Analogue is the future, yes; we all know that?! BUT think how much this analogue revolution relies on digital intervention and why it works so well.
You’ve got to go backwards to go forwards and forwards to go backwards, a hackneyed expression and a cliche indeed, but ‘all cliches are truism and all truisms are true’ – Kerouac. Anyway, already I digress.
We live in a highly technologised society, choc full of technofantastical delights and ‘chromed-up’ bits and bobs – chrome is so HOT in the future that’s why even Google are getting involved with it’s electroplated stylings – not just for Buck Rodgers now eh! Everyday we trawl through streets, websites and magazines brimming sickly ‘perfect’ imagery; the same clinical techniques, the same poses, the same question and even the same answer. We’ve only ourselves to blame.
In the early days photographers yearned to capture true naturalness, which was very difficult to achieve with film as there are so many variables involved, so many chances for things to go wrong, perfect skintone flawed by over agitation and a drop in temperature, for example. Then digital cameras came along, offering us the opportunity to finally see and edit images, instantly, it gave us immediate control in studio situations and more importantly it got rid of the mistakes.
It appeared to solve every photographic problem going; now, even the everyman – with no experience – can take gorgeous images. But that’s just it; a digital camera takes images, pixel-perfect formations of natural colour and tone. We don’t want images anymore; we want PICTURES! That’s why we shoot film, we embrace mistakes, we use mistakes as a form of expression as did Warhol – we all love a happy accident. This is a realisation that would’ve not existed had we not been given the machinery to create perfection in a ‘half-press to focus’ – ‘fully press to take image’.
More than needing digital photography to simply exist, analogue photography in this, the lord’s year 2011 also needs an audience; ironically analogue photography found it’s widest, most willing and most inspiring audience online, which is quite possibly the only thing in existence that is considered “a place” yet does not exist, basically it is the most digital of digital, a pixel-temple? How does one convert their grains to pixels in order to ‘do your bit’ for the analogue cause – “the greater good” if you like? Well you need a scanner or a device that creates a pixel composite of your molecular creations, turning your picture into an image, enabling you to share as you wish, through networking sites and community groups.
Analogue photography’s existence relies entirely on the actuality of digital imaging, it is called analogue only because there is an alternative – digital. It should not be seen as an antithesis to digital but something that exists harmoniously in our technological society; a way to go forwards by, in a sense, going backwards (but not really).